Because we already beat those guys on the road. And we beat 2 other top 3 teams and 7 top 20 teams and 8 top 25 teams after we take care of business vs Georgia. Why do we need to beat those guys twice to prove we are the best team in the nation? I'm confident we will not only beat Alabama, but beat them by double digits. My question to everyone is if in the unlikely event LSU loses to Bama and it's by 3 points, what the phuck have you proven? That can't be the end result of this wonderful season for college football fans who aren't biased one way or the other. Anybody else see the utter emptiness of that result?
I don't think that's what he means.. Bama is the only school close to LSU, only way to shut EVERYONE up would be to beat them again. Beat them again and not even Steve Smith can deny who the best team is..
I mean in the sense that many will refuse to acknowledge that LSU is the undisputed #1. Media wags and others will loudly proclaim that Bama got screwed and LSU was fortunate not to have to play them. Forget that we already played and whupped their ass at Bama. I don't want to hear any of that crap. I want to play Bama again and whip their ass again. In 2003 it was all about USC; in 2007 it was all about 2 losses and luck. Not this time. No questions.
I don't have a problem with that sentiment. And if we do play them, that's what we will playing for. To shut everybody the phuck up.
Because if Bama wins, both teams will have lost only to each other. Bama will be 12-1 against 5 teams with winning records and LSU will be 13-1 against 9 teams that were ranked including 4 ranked in the Top-3 and were division and conference champions to boot. But Bama would get the crystal football. . . just because they got a mulligan on the regular season loss. If you can't win your division or your conference, you have no business in the national championship game. Let a more ddeserving challenger get a shot and don't penalize LSU for having WON the game of the century! The whole friggin' reason that it was the "game of the century" was because it was supposed to eliminate a contender.
I agree with that sentiment as well, but at the end of the day, I don't really care what those media types say and think. We have already beaten bama this year and in their yard. The end. In La., we are used to catching flak from the media and outsiders. By now, I'm freaking immune to it.
Maybe if we don't play Bama the media will cry and moan that we got "lucky" and Bama was "just better". But maybe if we DO play Bama, and a 12-1 OK State hangs half a hundred on some poor Big East team, then those same people will run to their keyboard and loudly proclaim that the SEC got off easy because they didn't have to face a real conference champion in the NC game. Remember the Big 12 > SEC rhetoric that was so prevalent earlier this season?
And that's why Oklahoma State, should they drub Oklahoma (and I believe they will), should get that opportunity. It would prove the Iowa State game was a total fluke. If people do really believe the Big 12 is the best conference this year, them reward them by sending their champ to the BCS title game, should it be a 1 loss Oklahoma State.
This is how I see it as well. I don't care how the Robert Smith's of the world see it, if you don't have cross conference play between champions, you really can't say that your the best. We as SEC fans strongly suspect that our SEC defense will shut down the high flying offense of the Big 12, but we can't say that it did until it does. That is the number one reason in my mind that a 1 loss Okie State should be in the NC game over a previously beaten Bama team. They should just go ahead and book Bama for the Sugar Bowl. Even if LSU loses the SEC CG, LSU holds the tie breaker over Bama, and thus should be in the NCG. ... again, against Okie State.
